Palestine college student protest megathread

[ugabug]

Well, he's been apparently banned from the campus now because of his remarks.

https://edition.cnn.com/business/live-news/columbia-university-palestine-protests-04-26-24/h_0dab8638c24c4f433ce07dd802abaa46

[ugabug]

If it wasn't 'indiscriminately bombing' Gaza then (according to the World Bank/UN, 92% of primary roads, 84% of medical facilities, the majority of homes (alone accounting for nearly $14bn in losses) would not have been destroyed and 1.7 million people displaced.

Just because the death total is 'low' (even though in % terms it's actually comparable to other conflicts) does not mean the bombing is somehow 'targeted' when there's massive structural destruction.

Dresden was obliterated as a city in a literal firebombing campaign in 1945. 'Only' 25000 people died.

Except that figure from Dresden is high because at Dresden 25,000 people died over a period of only two days because it was an indiscriminate firebombing. If Israel had really been doing indiscriminate bombing like you say they are then you'd be seeing far higher casualties than 35,000 people over a period of six months. This is especially true when fighting against an enemy like Hamas who uses not only their own civilians but also their own infrastructure, such as schools and hospitals, as shields.

[ugabug]

If it wasn't 'indiscriminately bombing' Gaza then (according to the World Bank/UN, 92% of primary roads, 84% of medical facilities, the majority of homes (alone accounting for nearly $14bn in losses) would not have been destroyed and 1.7 million people displaced.

Just because the death total is 'low' (even though in % terms it's actually comparable to other conflicts) does not mean the bombing is somehow 'targeted' when there's massive structural destruction.

Dresden was obliterated as a city in a literal firebombing campaign in 1945. 'Only' 25000 people died.

So would you call the Dresden bombings a genocide ?

I think the word " Genocide " is being massively overused now, because if we're going down that road, and call the Dresden bombings a genocide, then well..... everything in war is a genocide then, heck you can call the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a Genocide.

Where did I call it a genocide? I called it a firebombing campaign. With a relatively 'low' mortality rate despite the city being obliterated.

The point being that 'oh only X were killed' is not an indicator of the lack of severity of an urban bombing campaign.

I agree how many died on it's own is not a good indicator but how many died during a period of time is a good indicator. 25,000 in a period of two days is a lot especially when the city had a population of around 600,000 people at that time. Compared to 35,000 out of around 2 million over six months and further, that 35,000 isn't all from bombings but also from ground combat. To me, that doesn't look anything like an indiscriminate bombing campaign.

[ugabug]

If it wasn't 'indiscriminately bombing' Gaza then (according to the World Bank/UN, 92% of primary roads, 84% of medical facilities, the majority of homes (alone accounting for nearly $14bn in losses) would not have been destroyed and 1.7 million people displaced.

Just because the death total is 'low' (even though in % terms it's actually comparable to other conflicts) does not mean the bombing is somehow 'targeted' when there's massive structural destruction.

Dresden was obliterated as a city in a literal firebombing campaign in 1945. 'Only' 25000 people died.

So would you call the Dresden bombings a genocide ?

I think the word " Genocide " is being massively overused now, because if we're going down that road, and call the Dresden bombings a genocide, then well..... everything in war is a genocide then, heck you can call the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki a Genocide.

Where did I call it a genocide? I called it a firebombing campaign. With a relatively 'low' mortality rate despite the city being obliterated.

The point being that 'oh only X were killed' is not an indicator of the lack of severity of an urban bombing campaign.

I agree how many died on it's own is not a good indicator but how many died during a period of time is a good indicator. 25,000 in a period of two days is a lot especially when the city had a population of around 600,000 people at that time. Compared to 35,000 out of around 2 million over six months and further, that 35,000 isn't all from bombings but also from ground combat. To me, that doesn't look anything like an indiscriminate bombing campaign.

If it wasn't 'indiscriminately bombing' Gaza then (according to the World Bank/UN, 92% of primary roads, 84% of medical facilities, the majority of homes (alone accounting for nearly $14bn in losses) would not have been destroyed and 1.7 million people displaced.

I posted previously how Hamas will use both their civilians and their infrastructure as shields, when a terrorist organization is willing to hide behind hospitals and homes you're going to get a lot of property damage. If the majority of homes in Gaza have been destroyed then I find it amazing that the casualty rate is as low as it is if Israel is bombing indiscriminately. Finally, as for the large amount of people displaced, that is what will happen during a war where a small but densely populated area becomes a battlefield.